Re: [s-d] [s-b] Definitely not a Bribe Proposal

[James Baxter <jebaxter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:58:27 -0800
> From: emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [s-d] [s-b] Definitely not a Bribe Proposal
> 
> 
> I believe the case that triggered a crisis last time was something like
> 
>   Rule 501:  blah blah [[ blah blah
> 
>   Rule 502:  blah blah blah blah
> 
>   Rule 503:  blah blah [[ blah blah ]] blah blah
> 
> which (if the ruleset is interpreted as one long document) means that
> all of Rule 502 is arguably commented out.



We don't consider rules as one document, each rule is a separate document. This is reflected in the current rule 11: "collective body of current Rule versions", implying that the rules are not already considered together and the ruleset is merely a collection of separate objects.

What happened last time is that there were two comments in the rule defining ntime so that commented out 3 lines, meaning the clock couldn't be turned back on and that the nweek counter couldn't increase. So nweek 112 passed normally, after era 3 started, but then the nday counter kept going to nday 13 and so no proposals were voted on after that. The only reason we were able to fix the game was that rule 0 was created in nweek 112. 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell us now
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss